↓ Skip to main content

Complexities in identifying and defining mathematics learning disability in the primary school-age years

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Dyslexia, January 2003
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
246 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
209 Mendeley
Title
Complexities in identifying and defining mathematics learning disability in the primary school-age years
Published in
Annals of Dyslexia, January 2003
DOI 10.1007/s11881-003-0011-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michèle M. M. Mazzocco, Gwen F. Myers

Abstract

This paper is a descriptive report of findings from a prospective longitudinal study of math disability (MD). The study was designed to address the incidence of MD during primary school, the utility of different MD definitions, and evidence of MD subtypes. The results illustrate the dynamic properties of psychometrically derived definitions of MD. Different groups of children meet criteria for MD depending on which measure(s) are used for identification. Over time, a given individual may not continue to meet MD criteria, even when using the same assessments. Thus, the findings lead to cautions regarding the single-tool/ one-time assessment for a clinical diagnosis of MD. Twenty-two of 209 participants demonstrated "persistent MD" (MD-p), or MD for more than one school grade. Reading disability was relatively more frequent in this MD-p subgroup than in the remaining participants (25 percent vs. 7 percent). Reading-related skills were correlated with math achievement, as were select visual spatial skills. There was minimal overlap between groups who met either a "poor achievement" criteria or an "IQ-achievement discrepancy," and the latter was far less stable a measure over time than the former. The results highlight the complexities of defining MD and illustrate the need for more research in this area.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 209 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Unknown 204 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 48 23%
Student > Master 28 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 23 11%
Researcher 21 10%
Student > Bachelor 20 10%
Other 36 17%
Unknown 33 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 82 39%
Social Sciences 29 14%
Mathematics 14 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 4%
Neuroscience 6 3%
Other 21 10%
Unknown 48 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 July 2022.
All research outputs
#4,978,221
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Dyslexia
#67
of 285 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,863
of 140,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Dyslexia
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 285 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 140,128 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.